Bazoogle

joined 2 years ago
[–] Bazoogle 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Instead of projectivy I use ATV Launcher Pro. It's pretty good. It allows for widgets, though I find many I want to display don't work correct, which is unfortunate. I did spend $3 on it, but I don't mind paying for an app. It just means the developer can make money without displaying ads

[–] Bazoogle 7 points 1 year ago

It's fun to think of them as the same people. But the reality is that they're two different people, and it's just changed who is considered right.

[–] Bazoogle 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

the delivery person gets paid for putting in the letterbox

This is precisely what I am saying. It is the delivery of advertisements that matters, not how many people actually see it (which is impossible to know in any advertising situation). Your TV analogy is not very good. During a broadcast, there is a live stream of data being sent to the TV. You cannot control what data is being streamed to that TV, you can only control if it's being displayed on your TV or not. Therefore, you cannot stop the delivery of the ads. If you are watching a show live, you cannot skip past the ads. If there are 5 minutes of ads, the best you can do is turn off the TV or walk away for 5 minutes. If the ad wasn't put in the broadcast to begin with, so never delivered, there's no way in hell the advertiser is paying for it.

So to answer your last question, it has nothing to do with seeing it or not. Purely delivery. The moment the mail is in your mailbox, the content is delivered. But if you put a lock on your mailbox, it cannot be delivered. If someone puts up a billboard, it doesn't matter how many people see it, the billboard is up. If you put your commercial in a television broadcast, it will indeed be broadcast. Though with the internet, people now have the ability to stop the delivery of ads altogether. Therefore, if you say you will pay for this service by receiving advertisements, and then the advertisements don't get delivered, that would be stealing.

[–] Bazoogle 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is still blind to the fact that those families could be in much much worse condition in 50 years if we don't drastically change our carbon emissions. The increasingly frequent and more dangerous natural disasters could very easily leave them without a home at all. Low income families will also be the ones to suffer the most when it comes to the worsening climate disaster

[–] Bazoogle 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Governments need to punish carbon emitting fuel sources more. People are going to use the cheaper option, not the one that will benefit the planet. It needs to be cheaper to use renewable energy, or at the very least energy efficient options need incentives.

[–] Bazoogle 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is under the assumption that the user agent change is real. I have seen this spread time and time again, and every time I ask if there is any evidence. So I will ask you as well: do you have evidence for it, or have you experienced it first hand? I have yet to have someone prove that this is true, and I have not been able to create it myself (I tried, but never got a delay to begin with). So until there is evidence that this is true, and not just a rumor being spread, than Occam's razor cannot apply.

[–] Bazoogle 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I appreciate the correction. Though I do ask that if you say it's outdated, you provide at least a brief explanation as to why. My understanding was that transgender was for those who identified as a different gender than their own, and transsexual were those who had medical procedures to change their physical sex.

[–] Bazoogle 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

That's the equivalent of just turning off your monitor when you get an ad. There isn't any great comparison to cable TV and streaming services. Because you can consume streaming services while stopping the delivery of all ads. even using sponsorblock for in video ads. You cannot for cable TV. The best you can do is turn it off while they play, but they will play nonetheless.

The closest you get to it with cable TV is DVR and skipping the ads (some going so far as to auto skip) but you're literally paying for cable TV. The fact cable TV as so many ads with how much it costs is absurd anyway. So of course you aren't stealing because you're already paying an inordinate amount of money for the service.

So I guess if one day YouTube has a paid service with ads, and you block the ads, the debate of whether its stealing or not could get pretty murky. The scebario is closer to tag switching at Walmart, which is still stealing, but I guess arguably less? But right now, while you aren't paying anything at all for a paid service, it's pretty cut and dry.

[–] Bazoogle 1 points 1 year ago

🤔😜😆😬😮‍💨

[–] Bazoogle 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Bazoogle 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What evidence is there of this being user-agent based? I've heard people make this claim, but I have not seen evidence of it and when testing on my own machine there was no delay at all.

[–] Bazoogle -1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

The difference is the content is being delivered to the TV. YouTube cannot advertise if you simply block adverts. It's still advertising even if you walk away from your computer or close your eyes. It's the same thing for junk mail. If you never get the junk mail, then it's never actually delivered. But if you immediately shred it without ever looking, it was still delivered even if you didn't bother to look. That delivery of advertisements is how Google funds YouTube. To prevent that delivery is to stop the transaction you agreed to. You are not holding up your end of the agreement for a non-free service.

To "simply elect what contents are played on your own machine" would mean not using YouTube. It wouldn't mean using YouTube on YOUR terms

view more: ‹ prev next ›